While I appreciate the kind words and deference to SSAC, and while we
would undoubtedly concur with recommendations to reserve names
like .local, ICANN actually listens to the IETF more directly.
Moreover, there is a specific slot on the Board of ICANN for a
Liaison from the IETF. Thomas Narten does a great job in that role,
as John Klensin did before him.
Steve
On Jul 2, 2008, at 12:53 PM, John Levine wrote:
In article <Pine(_dot_)GSO(_dot_)4(_dot_)63(_dot_)0807020927290(_dot_)12027(_at_)pita(_dot_)cisco(_dot_)com> you
write:
Paul,
But it is still the case that an application for say .local would
need
to go through some review process (regardless of price) which would
include input from the IETF ICANN rep.
More likely from the SSAC, which would be even better.
In any event, as I said before, although there's a lot not to like
about ICANN, the chances of them doing anything technically
destructive remains low.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet
for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-
Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf